Razd wrote:
Curiously I saw no reference to age of the universe in the article, so it appears that you are interpreting things from an article written by fox news. Have you read the source article by the scientist/s?
How could we interpret the statement about things appearing farther than they are in any other way than that this would imply a younger age of the universe? After all, isn't the distance that light has to travel across the universe from the stars a chief reason why we believe in an old universe?
Curiously that would not change the location of SN1987A at a mere 168,000 light years away, so the "bubble" is pretty big ... IF it exists.
Why would the bubble have to be unreasonably huge to skew our perceptions of the distance of SN1987A?
As long as you make up stuff about what evolutionists have faith in so that you can conclude you are correct.
What I have "faith" in involves the nature of objective reality being a true measure of that reality. There is a big difference between accepting ideas completely and using ideas as tentative explanations until better ones come along.
I hope you are not implying that I'm making stuff about what evolutionists believe. If so, please be more specific.
But I see the straw men on both sides. For instance, as a creationist, I see no conflict with believing in an old universe and my Christian faith.
Furthermore, because I believe in the dynamic inspiration (as opposed to the plenary inspiration) of the Bible, arguments against Biblical inerrancy don't conflict with my faith.
Does your faith mean that objective reality doesn't exist, can't be measured, observed, etc and used to test the validity of ideas?
Of course I believe in objective reality. And I believe in such an objective reality because I believe in objective truth.
Can truth be objective in a world where there is NOT a God?
I believe it was Einstein who once said, "The amazing thing about the universe is that it is knowable at all." This resonates with my Christianity which says that God initiated the relationship with man by revealing Himself (not the other way around).
You may ask this question because of a common straw man about faith, or at least about Christian faith. Christian faith isn't simply believing. Christian faith has an object. That object is what we call the Word of God.
Christianity teaches this in many places, but the most profound picture I can think of, is when it calls the son of God the Word of God and says that the Word became flesh. This is the convergence between the propositional and the existential.
I therefore don't simply believe... I believe in a God who has revealed Himself in a real historical event thru His son.
Edited by gregrjones, : No reason given.